Common Core State Standards

I’ve only been interacting directly with Common Core State Standards for about a year now. When I first started reading them my initial reaction was to bristle a little bit. It felt like a lot of information to soak in. How was I supposed to be able to remember all of this? Many of the standards seemed descriptively vague. How was I supposed to know if my students met the standards or not? How is everyone in the state supposed to teach the same standards? What about differentiation? What about the individual needs of each classroom? I had a lot of questions.

Over time and with a little more interaction with the Common Core State Standards, I’ve come to appreciate their value. One thing that helped me conceptualize the standards was to think of them as goals for growth rather than benchmarks to be met. I think this is one of the greatest strengths of the CCSS in that it really allows teachers the freedom to meet their students wherever they are and help them progress. Rather than giving students a standard they must achieve it gives them a framework for growth.  This means that the CCSSs can be applied to students who are high achievers just as well as it can be applied to those who are struggling; each student has room for progress.

I also found it helpful to look at the corresponding CCSSs for each successive grade level. In most cases, there is a common objective or theme within the corresponding CCSS, and each successive year simply brings out further nuances. This made the organization of the CCSS feel a lot more comprehensive to me and also made sense with regard to the teaching practice of building on prior knowledge.

Overall, I think I’m a fan of the Common Core State Standards. They aren’t without their challenges, and I think the Beach, Thein, and Webb handout did a good job of noting those. But overall, I think the standards, when applied the way they were intended to be applied, can provide a very helpful framework on which teachers can build a comprehensive curriculum.